Re: RAID5 vs Mirrored drives with NT 4.0 server

Hi,

Raid 5

• is cheap
• offers good fault tolerance
• is slow on writes
• offers good performance on reads

Raid 0+1 (mirroring and stripping).

• is more expensive
• offers good fault tolerance
• is fast on writes
• offers very good performance on reads

If you go for Raid5

• keep some disks on raid 0+1 or just mirrored for the redo logs, temp and system tablespace and rollback segments.
• buy disks with a lot of cache to compensate the poor writing performance
• buy several controllers

On either case, choose a lot of small disks instead of few big disks, the key is to spread the I/O as much as possible.

bllag_at_aol.com wrote in article <6fon4c$orj$1_at_nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> I am seeking information regarding RAID 5 vs Mirrored drives on a server
> running NT 4.0 and Oracle 7.3. I understand the economics, but I have
> customers who continue to opt for cheaper rather than mirror. My
 company's
> particular application is write intensive.

Thank you for any help.
>
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
>
Received on Wed Apr 01 1998 - 00:00:00 CST